Davis, G. E. Proposed technical society. Chem. News 41, 261 (1880).
IPCC Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
Gross, R., Hanna, R., Gambhir, A., Heptonstall, P. & Speirs, J. How long does innovation and commercialisation in the energy sectors take? Historical case studies of the timescale from invention to widespread commercialisation in energy supply and end use technology. Energy Policy 123, 682–699 (2018).
Harmsen, J. Industrial Process Scale-up: A Practical Innovation Guide from Idea to Commercial Implementation (Elsevier, 2019).
Wang, N., Akimoto, K. & Nemet, G. F. What went wrong? Learning from three decades of carbon capture, utilization and sequestration (CCUS) pilot and demonstration projects. Energy Policy 158, 112546 (2021).
Mankins, J. C. Technology readiness and risk assessments: a new approach. Acta Astronaut. 65, 1208–1215 (2009).
Koivisto, R. et al. Integrating future-oriented technology analysis and risk assessment methodologies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 76, 1163–1176 (2009).
Peng, F. in Foundations of Robotics: A Multidisciplinary Approach with Python and ROS (eds Herath, D. & St-Onge, D.) 63–81 (Springer, 2022).
Moore, T. et al. Electrolyzer energy dominates separation costs in state-of-the-art CO2 electrolyzers: implications for single-pass CO2 utilization. Joule 7, 782–796 (2023).
Walker, W. H., Lewis, W. K. & McAdams, W. H. Principles of Chemical Engineering (McGraw-Hill, 1923).
Bird, R. B., Stewart, W. E. & Lightfoot, E. N. Transport Phenomena (Wiley, 2006).
Whitaker, S. The Method of Volume Averaging 13 (Springer Science & Business Media, 1998).
McCabe, W. L., Smith, J. C. & Harriott, P. Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering (McGraw-Hill, 1993).
Levenspiel, O. Chemical Reaction Engineering (Wiley, 1998).
Fogler, H. Elements of Chemical Reaction Engineering (Pearson, 2020).
Deen, W. M. Analysis of Transport Phenomena (Oxford Univ. Press, 2011).
Lin, Y.-J. & Rochelle, G. T. Approaching a reversible stripping process for CO2 capture. Chem. Eng. J. 283, 1033–1043 (2016).
van Gool, W. Exergy analysis of industrial processes. Energy 17, 791–803 (1992).
Hoseinpoori, S., Pallarès, D., Johnsson, F. & Thunman, H. A comparative exergy-based assessment of direct air capture technologies. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 28, 39 (2023).
Christopher, K. & Dimitrios, R. A review on exergy comparison of hydrogen production methods from renewable energy sources. Energy Environ. Sci. 5, 6640–6651 (2012).
Riboldi, L. & Bolland, O. Evaluating pressure swing adsorption as a CO2 separation technique in coal-fired power plants. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 39, 1–16 (2015).
Holmes, H. E., Realff, M. J. & Lively, R. P. Water management and heat integration in direct air capture systems. Nat. Chem. Eng. 1, 208–215 (2024).
Hausmann, J. N. et al. Hyping direct seawater electrolysis hinders electrolyzer development. Joule 8, 2436–2442 (2024).
Ludwig, H. Reverse Osmosis Seawater Desalination Volume 2: Planning, Process Design and Engineering—A Manual for Study and Practice (Springer, 2022).
Velasco, J. A. C., Tawarmalani, M. & Agrawal, R. Systematic analysis reveals thermal separations are not necessarily most energy intensive. Joule 5, 330–343 (2021).
Lin, Y.-J., Chen, E. & Rochelle, G. T. Pilot plant test of the advanced flash stripper for CO2 capture. Faraday Discuss. 192, 37–58 (2016).
Sahinidis, N. The ALAMO approach to machine learning. Comput. Aided Chem. Eng 38, 2410 (2016).
Pedregosa, F. et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011).
Baker-Fales, M., Chen, T.-Y. & Vlachos, D. G. Scale-up of microwave-assisted, continuous flow, liquid phase reactors: application to 5-hydroxymethylfurfural production. Chem. Eng. J. 454, 139985 (2023).
Miriyala, S. S., Pujari, K. N., Naik, S. & Mitra, K. Evolutionary neural architecture search for surrogate models to enable optimization of industrial continuous crystallization process. Powder Technol. 405, 117527 (2022).
Miller, D. C. Accelerating the identification, development and scale up of carbon capture technologies through advanced modeling. In Proc. TechConnect World Innovation Conference & Expo NETL-PUB-1213 (OSTI, 2015).
Schweidtmann, A. M. et al. Machine learning in chemical engineering: a perspective. Chem. Ing. Tech. 93, 2029–2039 (2021).
Dobbelaere, M. R., Plehiers, P. P., Van de Vijver, R., Stevens, C. V. & Van Geem, K. M. Machine learning in chemical engineering: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. Engineering 7, 1201–1211 (2021).
Raissi, M., Perdikaris, P. & Karniadakis, G. E. Physics-informed neural networks: a deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations. J. Comput. Phys. 378, 686–707 (2019).
Brunton, S. L., Proctor, J. L. & Kutz, J. N. Discovering governing equations from data by sparse identification of nonlinear dynamical systems. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 3932–3937 (2016).
Benner, P., Gugercin, S. & Willcox, K. A survey of projection-based model reduction methods for parametric dynamical systems. SIAM Rev. 57, 483–531 (2015).
Rowley, C. W. & Dawson, S. T. Model reduction for flow analysis and control. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 49, 387–417 (2017).
Chen, R. T., Rubanova, Y., Bettencourt, J. & Duvenaud, D. K. Neural ordinary differential equations. In Neural Information Processing Systems (2018).
Fries, W. D., He, X. & Choi, Y. LaSDI: parametric latent space dynamics identification. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 399, 115436 (2022).
Li, Z. et al. Fourier neural operator for parametric partial differential equations. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.08895 (2020).
McBane, S. & Choi, Y. Component-wise reduced order model lattice-type structure design. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 381, 113813 (2021).
Chung, S. W. et al. Train small, model big: scalable physics simulators via reduced order modeling and domain decomposition. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 427, 117041 (2024).
Wilson, G. & Deal, C. Activity coefficients and molecular structure. Activity coefficients in changing environments-solutions of groups. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 1, 20–23 (1962).
Fredenslund, A., Jones, R. L. & Prausnitz, J. M. Group-contribution estimation of activity coefficients in nonideal liquid mixtures. AIChE J. 21, 1086–1099 (1975).
Haslam, A. J. et al. Expanding the applications of the SAFT-γ Mie group-contribution equation of state: prediction of thermodynamic properties and phase behavior of mixtures. J. Chem. Eng. Data 65, 5862–5890 (2020).
Walker, P. J., Yew, H.-W. & Riedemann, A. Clapeyron.jl: an extensible, open-source fluid thermodynamics toolkit. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 61, 7130–7153 (2022).
Davidopoulou, C. & Ouranidis, A. Pharma 4.0—artificially intelligent digital twins for solidified nanosuspensions. Pharmaceutics 14, 2113 (2022).
Papadopoulos, A. I. et al. Molecular engineering of sustainable phase-change solvents: from digital design to scaling-up for CO2 capture. Chem. Eng. J. 420, 127624 (2021).
Winter, B., Winter, C., Esper, T., Schilling, J. & Bardow, A. SPT-NRTL: a physics-guided machine learning model to predict thermodynamically consistent activity coefficients. Fluid Phase Equilib. 568, 113731 (2023).
Ghoroghi, A., Rezgui, Y., Petri, I. & Beach, T. Advances in application of machine learning to life cycle assessment: a literature review. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 27, 433–456 (2022).
Frey, D., Neyerlin, K. C. & Modestino, M. A. Bayesian optimization of electrochemical devices for electrons-to-molecules conversions: the case of pulsed CO2 electroreduction. React. Chem. Eng. 8, 323–331 (2023).
Shen, Y. et al. Automation and computer-assisted planning for chemical synthesis. Nat. Rev. Methods Primer 1, 23 (2021).
Annevelink, E. et al. AutoMat: automated materials discovery for electrochemical systems. MRS Bull. 47, 1036–1044 (2022).
Lee, N. A., Shen, S. C. & Buehler, M. J. An automated biomateriomics platform for sustainable programmable materials discovery. Matter 5, 3597–3613 (2022).
Tajsoleiman, T. Automating Experimentation in Miniaturized Reactors (Technical Univ. Denmark, 2018).
Selekman, J. A. et al. High-throughput automation in chemical process development. Annu. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 8, 525–547 (2017).
Alwosheel, A., van Cranenburgh, S. & Chorus, C. G. Is your dataset big enough? Sample size requirements when using artificial neural networks for discrete choice analysis. J. Choice Model. 28, 167–182 (2018).
Zhao, Y., Gao, J., Bian, X., Tang, H. & Zhang, T. From the perspective of experimental practice: high-throughput computational screening in photocatalysis. Green Energy Environ. 9, 1–6 (2024).
Chakraborty, S. et al. Rational design: a high-throughput computational screening and experimental validation methodology for lead-free and emergent hybrid perovskites. ACS Energy Lett. 2, 837–845 (2017).
Schütter, C., Husch, T., Korth, M. & Balducci, A. Toward new solvents for EDLCs: from computational screening to electrochemical validation. J. Phys. Chem. C 119, 13413–13424 (2015).
Stephens, I. E. et al. 2022 roadmap on low temperature electrochemical CO2 reduction. J. Phys. Energy 4, 042003 (2022).
Li, X., Wang, S., Li, L., Sun, Y. & Xie, Y. Progress and perspective for in situ studies of CO2 reduction. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 9567–9581 (2020).
Moss, A. B. et al. In operando investigations of oscillatory water and carbonate effects in MEA-based CO2 electrolysis devices. Joule 7, 350–365 (2023).
Biswas, I. et al. Advancement of segmented cell technology in low temperature hydrogen technologies. Energies 13, 2301 (2020).
Heldebrant, D. J. et al. Water-lean solvents for post-combustion CO2 capture: fundamentals, uncertainties, opportunities and outlook. Chem. Rev. 117, 9594–9624 (2017).
Ellebracht, N. C. et al. 3D printed triply periodic minimal surfaces as advanced structured packings for solvent-based CO2 capture. Energy Environ. Sci. 16, 1752–1762 (2023).
Kvamsdal, H. M. & Rochelle, G. T. Effects of the temperature bulge in CO2 absorption from flue gas by aqueous monoethanolamine. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 47, 867–875 (2008).
Sun, S. et al. Real-time imaging and holdup measurement of carbon dioxide under CCS conditions using electrical capacitance tomography. IEEE Sens. J. 18, 7551–7559 (2018).
Gouedard, C., Picq, D., Launay, F. & Carrette, P.-L. Amine degradation in CO2 capture. I. A review. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 10, 244–270 (2012).
Dalton, A., Wolff, K. & Bekker, B. Multidisciplinary research as a complex system. Int. J. Qual. Methods 20, 16094069211038400 (2021).
Singh, R. K. et al. Hydrodynamics of countercurrent flow in an additive-manufactured column with triply periodic minimal surfaces for carbon dioxide capture. Chem. Eng. J. 450, 138124 (2022).
Moore, T., Nguyen, D., Iyer, J., Roy, P. & Stolaroff, J. K. Advanced absorber heat integration via heat exchange packings. AIChE J. 67, e17243 (2021).
Gongora, A. E. et al. Accelerating the design of lattice structures using machine learning. Sci. Rep. 14, 13703 (2024).
Lin, T. Y. et al. Advancing carbon capture from bench to pilot scale using dynamic similitude. Cell Rep. Phys. Sci. 5, 102019 (2024).
Xia, J., Jödecke, M., Pérez-Salado Kamps, Á. & Maurer, G. Solubility of CO2 in (CH3OH + H2O). J. Chem. Eng. Data 49, 1756–1759 (2004).